[proposed letter] NCSG Concerns About the Sale of the Public Interest Registry to Ethos Capital

[Nick Shorey]

Hi Ayden,

Thanks for the responses. I agree it is possible it could be seen as an indirect change, though I read it more as a situation where PIR were to outsource registry backend operations for example.

Re open tender - I’d personally prefer PIR remained as it were. An open tender process risks the potential for an even less appropriate operator winning the bid.

Kind regards,

Nick

Nick Shorey
Phone: +44 (0) 7552 455 988
Email: lists at nickshorey.com
Skype: nick.shorey
Twitter: @nickshorey
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin
Web: www.nickshorey.com




> On 4 Dec 2019, at 15:32, Amr Elsadr <aelsadr at ICANNPOLICY.NINJA> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> On Dec 4, 2019, at 5:24 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at FERDELINE.COM> wrote:
>> 
>> This letter is not about halting the sale; it is about preventing the transfer of the Registry Agreements for .ORG, .NGO, and .ONG to Ethos Capital. The decision to sell PIR's assets is indeed a matter for ISOC to decide. If this is not clear please feel free to edit the letter to make this distinction more evident. Thanks!
> 
> Nobody (to my knowledge) has suggested that a transfer of the Registry Agreements to Ethos will take place. This would make Ethos the Contracted Party, but by all accounts I’ve seen, they will still remain with PIR.
> 
> But yes…, I do agree that this might qualify as an indirect change of control.
> 
> The way that the letter is currently worded suggests that the NCSG will ask the ICANN Board to terminate PIR’s Registry Agreements, and transfer them to another entity.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Amr

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20191204/3d601942/attachment.htm>